Based on 12 and 1582 real audits
| Metric | Conversant Consent Tool | core-js | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 23 | 36 | core-js |
| Accessibility | 83 | 88 | core-js |
| Best Practices | 74 | 84 | core-js |
| SEO | 89 | 91 | core-js |
| Security | 64 | 65 | core-js |
| TTFB | 330ms | 374ms | Conversant Consent Tool |
| Composite | 71 | 72 | core-js |
core-js outperforms Conversant Consent Tool in 6 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (72 vs 71). Conversant Consent Tool leads in TTFB.
Choose Conversant Consent Tool when your primary concern is server response time. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose core-js when your primary concern is performance and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 12 audited Conversant Consent Tool sites and 1582 audited core-js sites in the BeaverCheck database. Every audit runs the same 100+ checks — Lighthouse performance, security headers, accessibility, SEO, server response time — against a real URL. No vendor input, no sponsorship, no affiliate links. Read the full methodology →
Send Feedback